Recommendations for Research and Clinical Implementation of Ambulatory Assessment, Mood Monitoring, Digital Phenotyping, and Remote Measurement Technology in Mood Disorders: Synthesis of Systematic Review Findings

AI Summary

Ambulatory assessment provides real-time granularity and confirmation but lacks robustness to replace standard clinical outcomes; additional contextual data remain essential.
Implementation faces barriers: inconsistent performance, adverse effects, and user disengagement, limiting feasibility and acceptability in medium to long-term studies.
Future research and clinical use require more rigorous evaluation, greater personalisation, and responsible, user-centred design guided by lived experience and methodological standards.

AI Summary

BACKGROUND: Ambulatory assessment and active and passive monitoring all offer a real-time, flexible approach to assessing mood and behavior in mood disorders. OBJECTIVE: This study synthesizes the findings from 7 systematic reviews, integrating quantitative and qualitative data from randomized trials, observational studies, and user experience research to evaluate the performance, feasibility, acceptability, and clinical impact of ambulatory assessment and mood monitoring in people with depression and bipolar disorder. CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory assessment and mood monitoring hold promise in research and clinical practice, yet their implementation requires more rigorous evaluation, greater personalization, and responsible, user-centered design.

Basic summary

JMIR Ment Health. 2026 Jun 2;13:e79501. doi: 10.2196/79501.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Ambulatory assessment and active and passive monitoring all offer a real-time, flexible approach to assessing mood and behavior in mood disorders. Despite their potential, concerns remain regarding the performance, usability, adherence, and potential safety of these tools.

OBJECTIVE: This study synthesizes the findings from 7 systematic reviews, integrating quantitative and qualitative data from randomized trials, observational studies, and user experience research to evaluate the performance, feasibility, acceptability, and clinical impact of ambulatory assessment and mood monitoring in people with depression and bipolar disorder. We assessed studies over the medium or long term (3 months or more).

METHODS: A summary of a series of systematic reviews was carried out by the authors-including meta-analyses (for quantitative data) and meta-syntheses (for qualitative data). Eight electronic databases were searched, and mixed methods studies were included. Studies were assessed for risk of bias. The results were checked for coherence, and recommendations were made by individuals with lived experience, methodologists, and psychiatrists. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) was used to assess the quality and strength of the evidence.

RESULTS: The 111 included studies included 19,945 participants and used 69 different ambulatory assessment protocols or mood-monitoring interventions. Key barriers to implementation were identified, including performance inconsistency, adverse effects, and user disengagement. Evidence-based recommendations are provided to guide future clinical and research applications.

CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory assessment and mood monitoring hold promise in research and clinical practice, yet their implementation requires more rigorous evaluation, greater personalization, and responsible, user-centered design. Crucially, these measures can add granularity and confirmation, but additional context is often required, and none of these measures are robust enough yet to replace current outcomes.

PMID:42228842 | DOI:10.2196/79501

Document this CPD